Legal Opinion

State ex rel. Bevins v. Johnson

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided September 5, 2012No. 2012-0586PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the petition of appellant, Andrew Bevins Jr., for a writ of habeas corpus. Bevins’s claims are not cognizable in habeas corpus. Boles v. Knob, 130 Ohio St.3d 339, 2011-Ohio-5049, 958 N.E.2d 554, ¶ 1 (speedy trial); Thomas v. Huffman, 84 Ohio St.3d 266, 267, 703 N.E.2d 315 (1998) (equal protection); Bellman v. Jago, 38 Ohio St.3d 55, 55-56, 526 N.E.2d 308 (1988) (due process). Bevins had an adequate remedy by appeal to raise his claims.

Judgment affirmed.

O’Connor, C.J., and Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton, O’Donnell, Lanzinger, Cupp,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Boles v. KnabOhio Supreme Court · 2011
  2. Thomas v. HuffmanOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Bellman v. JagoOhio Supreme Court · 1988

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Bevins v. RichardOhio Supreme Court · 2015

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API